Woman forced to travel to England for abortion calls for law change

bumper234

So here we go again with another woman refused an abortion (this time in the North)

http://www.independent.ie/incoming/woman-forced-to-travel-to-england-for-abortion-calls-for-law-change-29647794.html



Woman forced to travel to England for abortion calls for law change

Even though her baby had not developed a skull and was completely brain dead she was refused a termination under the current legislation.

Instead, doctors said she would have to wait for the baby to die then have an induced labour.

Crazy

Terry1985

bumper234 wrote: »

Even though her baby had not developed a skull and was completely brain dead

But it could still survive a grow up to become an internet forum moderator...

Mod: Banned.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Terry1985 wrote: »

But it could still survive a grow up to become an internet forum moderator...

That's not funny, but shame on me I laughed.

bumper234

Terry1985 wrote: »

But it could still survive a grow up to become an internet forum moderator...

Oh my :eek:

Mr. Incognito

Link?

bumper234

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Link?

My apologies link also added to the op


http://www.independent.ie/incoming/woman-forced-to-travel-to-england-for-abortion-calls-for-law-change-29647794.html

Knight who says Meh

bumper234 wrote: »

So here we go again with another woman refused an abortion (this time in the North)

http://www.independent.ie/incoming/woman-forced-to-travel-to-england-for-abortion-calls-for-law-change-29647794.html



Woman forced to travel to England for abortion calls for law change

Even though her baby had not developed a skull and was completely brain dead she was refused a termination under the current legislation.

Instead, doctors said she would have to wait for the baby to die then have an induced labour.

Crazy

Its Gods will. Who are you to question..

martinedwards

cant be bothered to look up the link, but if it was brain DEAD then why were they waiting for it to die?

Seachmall

martinedwards wrote: »

cant be bothered to look up the link, but if it was brain DEAD then why were they waiting for it to die?

Heart must have been beating.

wp_rathead

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Its Gods will. Who are you to question..

It is not "gods will"..

And who are we to not allow this woman control her own body

bumper234

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Its Gods will. Who are you to question..

wprathead wrote: »

It is not "gods will"..

And who are we to not allow this woman control her own body

Oh Knight was being serious?:eek: I thought it was sarcasm....man it's been a long week.

wp_rathead

bumper234 wrote: »

Oh Knight was being serious?:eek: I thought it was sarcasm....man it's been a long week.

Oh maybe was sarcasm, im traveling on way too work so maybe i read it wrong

Rubberchikken

'But it could still survive a grow up to become an internet forum moderator...'

forgive me but i laughed.

cannot see why a woman who wants an abortion can not have one. let her speak to professional counsellor first, then be able to do with her body what she wishes.
too many people in this world think they have a say in someone's life, yet where are they when really needed.
spare me.

hansfrei

Female fetuses in the UK are now the most at risk group a new report has said.

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

bumper234

hansfrei wrote: »

Female fetuses in the UK are now the most at risk group a new report has said.

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

Link?

Seachmall

hansfrei wrote: »

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

Sure if it's a life from conception with all the rights of anyone else then abortion for any reason is unjustifiable.

If it's not then abortion for any reason is justifiable.


Either way gender selective abortion is neither worse nor better than abortion in cases of incest, for example.

hansfrei

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10360386/Law-does-not-prohibit-sex-selection-abortions-DPP-warns.html


To re-cap. Gender selective abortionsare not illegal. This follows the trial of two doctors carrying out such proceedures.

hansfrei

Seachmall wrote: »

Sure if it's a life from conception with all the rights of anyone else then abortion for any reason is unjustifiable.

If it's not then abortion for any reason is justifiable.


Either way gender selective abortion is neither worse nor better than abortion in cases of incest, for example.

Jayzis.

Seachmall

hansfrei wrote: »

Jayzis.

It is what it is.

bumper234

hansfrei wrote: »

Female fetuses in the UK are now the most at risk group a new report has said.

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

Any sign of that link?

kneemos

hansfrei wrote: »

Female fetuses in the UK are now the most at risk group a new report has said.

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

Probably something to do with ethnic traditions.If true.

December2012

hansfrei wrote: »

Female fetuses in the UK are now the most at risk group a new report has said.

Gender selective abortion (only for reasons of gender). This is what we have to look forward to?

Which has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread. She was seeking a termination of pregnancy now because her baby had encephaly not because of its gender.

hansfrei

bumper234 wrote: »

Any sign of that link?

That paper is where the story broke. Sir Edward Leigh MP is quoted as saying "The most dangerous position to be in Briton today is to be a female feteous."

Huff post carries the story, most other news outlets too. Google it.

hansfrei

December2012 wrote: »

Which has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread. She was seeking a termination of pregnancy now because her baby had encephaly not because of its gender.

It was a reply.

angelfire9

Ye do realise this case is in NORTHERN Ireland not the 26 counties??

Seachmall

hansfrei wrote: »

It was a reply.

It was an attempt to derail the discussion.


It has been modestly successful.

jr22

Terry1985 wrote: »

But it could still survive a grow up to become an internet forum moderator...

Mod: Banned.

Ha ha! Probably the only worthwhile comment I've ever read on an abortion thread.

General General

wprathead wrote: »

Oh maybe was sarcasm, im traveling on way too work so maybe i read it wrong

Sure, God willed that you read it the way that you did...

bumper234

Khannie wrote: »

Serious question - maybe someone can answer this. How is a brain dead baby not considered dead? I mean if the baby was outside the mothers womb and being kept alive artificially, the mother would have the right to pull the plug, right?

The consensus seems to be that because it has a heartbeat it is still considered "alive" and maybe Jeebus or Buddha, Allah, Ganesha could perform one of those miracles and create a working brain or something. Hey if popes can heal by touch maybe one of those could have visited the baby and fixed it right up.

tritium

Anencephaly is an unusual condition whereby the major part of the brain never develops though some parts of the brain and some lower brain functions do develop (someone with better medical knowledge can give a more detailed description). Its one of the saddest birth conditions ive ever come across. The child typically only lives for at most a few hours post delivery but it is a living breathing child, albeit without the majority of its brain

From an ethics point of view there's been a lot of debate as to how to consider these cases as it also impacts things like organ transplants. It's also obviously traumatic for the parents in terms of choosing to either abort a child who has no hope of survival or go through with giving birth to a child you know will at best die in your arms.

PopePalpatine

hansfrei wrote: »

That paper is where the story broke. Sir Edward Leigh MP is quoted as saying "The most dangerous position to be in Briton today is to be a female feteous."

Huff post carries the story, most other news outlets too. Google it.

Sir Edward Leigh is the chairman of the religious conservative "Cornerstone" group within the Tories. Considering that he opposes contraception (which would help cut down unwanted pregnancies that would result in abortions), his opinion is far from impartial.

indy_man

Later on in this video is more information on problems with abortions in UK.

PopePalpatine

indy_man wrote: »

Later on in this video is more information on problems with abortions in UK.

"Information"? You missed the "mis" at the start.

This thread was terminated long ago, so back to Alive! HQ with you.

catallus

I forgot to thank you for recommending that site to me

indy_man

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Information"? You missed the "mis" at the start.

This thread was terminated long ago, so back to Alive! HQ with you.

What misinformation are you referring to in?

PopePalpatine

indy_man wrote: »

What misinformation are you referring to in?

That video.

Time and time again, it's reactionaries like you who are devoid of empathy for women who've had abortions, regardless of the reason.

indy_man

PopePalpatine wrote: »

That video.

Time and time again, it's reactionaries like you who are devoid of empathy for women who've had abortions, regardless of the reason.

Sorry Pope but your last statement is complete nonsense. Part of the goal of that video is to prevent abortions in order to save women from this distress and it refers to the plight of one woman who has suffered.

Don't try and push your abortion agenda and claim you have empathy for women.

Midnight Sundance

If you've ever watched Private Practice, one of the characters had a baby with this defect. It was a very sad storyline.

I feel very sorry for the lady is this headline, no outcome would have been a good outcome for her.travelling to london added to the already huge trauma she would have been suffering.
I really wish doctors would sometimes just stop and think about what they would do in a situation like this and see if they would have made the same decision.
Poor lady, heart goes out to her. She has lost a baby and must be in bits!

eviltwin

indy_man wrote: »

Sorry Pope but your last statement is complete nonsense. Part of the goal of that video is to prevent abortions in order to save women from this distress and it refers to the plight of one woman who has suffered.

Don't try and push your abortion agenda and claim you have empathy for women.

That bit in bold being the relevant bit here.

PopePalpatine

indy_man wrote: »

Sorry Pope but your last statement is complete nonsense. Part of the goal of that video is to prevent abortions in order to save women from this distress and it refers to the plight of one woman who has suffered.

Don't try and push your abortion agenda and claim you have empathy for women.

How will it "prevent abortions"? By slut-shaming?

If you want to "prevent abortions", prevent unwanted pregnancies arising in the first place.

shruikan2553

indy_man wrote: »

Sorry Pope but your last statement is complete nonsense. Part of the goal of that video is to prevent abortions in order to save women from this distress and it refers to the plight of one woman who has suffered.

Don't try and push your abortion agenda and claim you have empathy for women.

Maybe it should talk about that instead of bitching about RTE. RTE is ****, welcome to the world.

P_1

That video looks suspiciously like an Iona creation...

LETHAL LADY

Christ on a bike that is one ****ing dumbass video. Is it anti RTE or abortion?
I stand to be corrected but wasn't one of the main issues with the legislation being that it didn't cover fatal foetal abnormalities, not that the vast majority of people were anti-abortion.
Also, the tragic story of the Irish based woman bleeding to death in a taxi surely reinforces the need to have access here for women who choose to have abortions, rather than making them travel and then having to rush to catch a flight or ferry home after the procedure, which in turn may lead to them missing out on vital aftercare.

UCDVet

Without expressing an opinion on abortion either way - I feel like the title of this thread is incorrect and intentionally inflammatory.

She wasn't *forced* to travel to England.

She voluntarily went to England for something that she couldn't legally find in Ireland. She would prefer if that something where legal in Ireland. Some people will agree, some people will disagree....but she was not forced to travel to England.

Muise...

UCDVet wrote: »

Without expressing an opinion on abortion either way - I feel like the title of this thread is incorrect and intentionally inflammatory.

She wasn't *forced* to travel to England.

She voluntarily went to England for something that she couldn't legally find in Ireland. She would prefer if that something where legal in Ireland. Some people will agree, some people will disagree....but she was not forced to travel to England.

Thanks Dr Semantics. While you're correct in saying that the obligation to continue an unviable pregnancy - visibly, with everyone making nice chit-chat about it, knowing that you're going to deliver a dead baby whose poor deformed body will give you nightmares - isn't exactly a gun to one's head, your innocuous terms 'voluntarily' and 'prefer' don't cover it either.

UCDVet

UCDVet wrote: »

Without expressing an opinion on abortion either way - I feel like the title of this thread is incorrect and intentionally inflammatory.

She wasn't *forced* to travel to England.

She voluntarily went to England for something that she couldn't legally find in Ireland. She would prefer if that something where legal in Ireland. Some people will agree, some people will disagree....but she was not forced to travel to England.

Some major underplaying of a huge human tragedy there.

She is in the middle of an agonising situation that medical staff here are more than able (and I'd guess mostly willing) to alleviate, but instead she has to leave her home and surroundings to get treatment elsewhere, removed from all her usual supports.

Some choice.

UCDVet

Muise... wrote: »

Thanks Dr Semantics. While you're correct in saying that the obligation to continue an unviable pregnancy - visibly, with everyone making nice chit-chat about it, knowing that you're going to deliver a dead baby whose poor deformed body will give you nightmares - isn't exactly a gun to one's head, your innocuous terms 'voluntarily' and 'prefer' don't cover it either.

I think it's best to be as fair and objective as possible. Saying she was 'forced' helps frame the tone of the discussion that will follow.

As I understand it, the law in Northern Ireland won't allow an abortion unless there is a physical risk to the Mother. And the laws around it haven't changed in a very long time. Lots of reasonable people support the law as it is.

But saying:

'Doctor's forced to follow law that was legally passed and many support, even though the situation is atypical and lots of people think it's inappropriate in this particular case....leaving a woman with the options of either continuing to carrying her baby until it dies, is born, presents a health risk, or to pursue options outside Northern Ireland'

Doesn't have the same ring.

And what qualifies as a 'serious defect' for abortions in the UK are pretty ambiguous. A lot of people disagree with it, some groups push to get certain conditions (like Cleft lip) pulled from the list of qualifying defects.

All I'm saying is it's unfair to use this example, in isolation, and paint everyone involved as monsters that forced some poor girl to leave the country.

Nodin

UCDVet wrote: »

I think it's best to be as fair and objective as possible. Saying she was 'forced' helps frame the tone of the discussion that will follow.

As I understand it, the law in Northern Ireland won't allow an abortion unless there is a physical risk to the Mother. And the laws around it haven't changed in a very long time. Lots of reasonable people support the law as it is.

.

Lots of reasonable people support a law that forces a woman to either give birth to a child that has no hope of surivival - that is braindead - or travel abroad?

Grayson

UCDVet wrote: »

Lots of reasonable people support the law as it is.

they're not reasonable.

In this case a woman with a foetus, that had no skull, was brain dead and would never be born alive, was told that she would have to wait till it died and then she would be forced into labour to give birth to a dead malformed foetus.

Reasonable people everywhere support that. :rolleyes:

It's possible to have a logical reasonable discussion about abortion, but when people are against this, it's not reasonable or logical. It's based in stupid idealism.

Muise...

UCDVet wrote: »

I think it's best to be as fair and objective as possible. Saying she was 'forced' helps frame the tone of the discussion that will follow.

As I understand it, the law in Northern Ireland won't allow an abortion unless there is a physical risk to the Mother. And the laws around it haven't changed in a very long time. Lots of reasonable people support the law as it is.

But saying:

'Doctor's forced to follow law that was legally passed and many support, even though the situation is atypical and lots of people think it's inappropriate in this particular case....leaving a woman with the options of either continuing to carrying her baby until it dies, is born, presents a health risk, or to pursue options outside Northern Ireland'

Doesn't have the same ring.

And what qualifies as a 'serious defect' for abortions in the UK are pretty ambiguous. A lot of people disagree with it, some groups push to get certain conditions (like Cleft lip) pulled from the list of qualifying defects.

All I'm saying is it's unfair to use this example, in isolation, and paint everyone involved as monsters that forced some poor girl to leave the country.

Is it really just the term "forced" you have a problem with here?

I don't see how we can discuss this "example" - a person with a traumatic medical problem, who won't have the healthy baby she hoped for - without painting as monsters the people who actively block changes to the law (in NI) that would allow her and others carrying unviable foetuses some dignity and relief from her suffering. Cleft lips have nothing to do with this case.

Grayson

let's not forget the gem that groups like youth defense always spout. there is never a medical need for a termination.